The United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Pesticide Data Program (PDP) recently released its latest annual summary detailing pesticide residues in the U.S. food supply. The data, from 2005, reveals approximately two-thirds of sampled foods contained one or more pesticides at detectable levels.
For the 2005 report, PDP sampled fresh and processed fruit and vegetables, soybeans, wheat, milk, heavy cream, pork, bottled water and drinking water. These items were tested for various insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and growth regulators.
Drinking water analyses primarily found widely used herbicides and their metabolites; forty-eight different residues were found in untreated intake water and 43 in treated water.
Monday, March 5, 2007
USDA Finds Pesticide Residues in Majority of Foods
Study Finds Organic Food Is Safer for Children
Children who eat a diet of organic food show a level of pesticides in their body that is six times lower than children who eat a diet of conventionally produced food, according to a study published in the March 2003 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives.
The study, Organopho sphorus Pesticide Exposure of Urban and Suburban Preschool Children with Organic and Conventional Diets, used biological monitoring to examine the effects of food eaten by preschool children. Eighteen of the children examined were fed organic diets, and 21 were fed conventional diets. Parents kept a diary of their child's diet for three days, after which 24-hour urine samples were taken to look for metabolites of organophosphate (OP) pesticides. Significantly higher concentrations of OP metabolites were found in the children with conventional diets. According to the authors, "The dose estimates suggest that consumption of organic fruits, vegetables, and juice can reduce children's exposure levels from above to below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's current guidelines, thereby shifting exposures from a range of uncertain risk to a range of negligible risk."
Local or Organic: A False Choice
The Time Magazine cover story (March 2nd issue) provides interesting reading. In "Eating Better Than Organic", the author makes his choice for choosing local over organic (but please keep in mind that the author also chooses to eat at McDonalds - the fast food chain, not the farm).
Samuel Fromartz provides a more balanced account in his article, "Local Or Organic: A False Choice", written last year.
Tell FDA: No Food From Cloned Animals!
The FDA has a poor track record in evaluating the science of animal cloning. In 2003, the agency released a draft assessment that was widely heralded as demonstrating the safety of cloned food; yet this assessment relied on a single industry- sponsored study of cloned milk. The agency's latest assessment claims that no issues in food from animal clones were found, yet among the few new studies cited, several reported troubling results.
Among the studies, published just this month, one found a failure rate in animal cloning of over 90%, with over 40% of "successful" clones suffering from disabling health problems leading to early death.
Another found significant health differences in clones' offspring compared to normal animals. A third study found that healthy appearing clones are often physiologically different than normal animals, and concluded that food from clones should not be marketed without further research. The National Academy of Sciences has said that there is not enough data to know if the hidden defects in clones could pose food safety risks.
Furthermore, surrogate (host) cows used to produce clones are often given massive doses of hormones, and to survive their early health problems, clones are often treated with high doses of antibiotics and other veterinary drugs. Commercialization of cloning would almost certainly increase levels of veterinary hormones and antibiotics in the human food supply, but FDA has failed to address the food safety issues of this increase in medicating food animals.
Perhaps even more troubling, FDA has ignored the animal cruelty issues inherent in cloning. Surrogate cows must be used to produce clones, and these surrogates suffer from high rates of late-term spontaneous abortion, early prenatal deaths, and grossly oversized calves, and often have severe pregnancy complications and caesarian births. Cloned offspring suffer from common defects such as enlarged tongues, squashed faces, intestinal blockages, immune deficiencies and diabetes. These are not unusual side-affects, but a certain inhumane cost of animal cloning.
The BioDaVersity Code
A secret held for thousands of years is about to be exposed at DaversityCode.com.Join animal symbologist Robert Penguin and the dashing agent Sophie Minnow as they race to expose the greatest lie ever told. Can they crack the Bio DaVersity Code, or will they fall victim to the lurking killer just a step behind?
Sure it's just a cartoon, but this may be the most important movie you'll see this year. In fact, mankind's very survival may depend upon it!
Indoor air pollution
A growing body of scientific evidence is showing that indoor air can be more seriously polluted than outside air. Household cleaning products are among the many sources of this pollution. In particular, studies carried out by the EPA have found levels of certain pollutants to be two to five times higher inside homes than outside, and inside is where people are estimated to spend 90 percent of their time. This is of particular concern for the young, elderly, and chronically ill, who are more susceptible to the effects of pollutants.
A common source of indoor air pollutants are volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which are emitted by a variety of household cleaning products and air fresheners. Health effects from indoor air pollutants can be experienced upon exposure or possibly years later, depending on the type and amount of the chemical and the duration of exposure. More immediate health effects include irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat; headaches; dizziness; and fatigue. Long-term effects may include some respiratory diseases, heart disease, and cancer.
To learn more about indoor air quality, visit the American Lung Association’s Indoor Air Quality Web site, or the EPA’s Indoor Air Quality Web site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
